On how to realise it: What about LW-crowd sourcing? For a “month” ideas for for-profit start-ups are gathered. For a “month” the LW crowd ranks them (by for example committing real money) , for a “month” people interested in the 10 most funded ideas can apply for a job, the LW crowd has a month to choose which people will be “hired”. Solves part of the funding problem and the team-makeing.
Iabalka
Karma: 51
What does it mean “being agenty” ?
the link in point 3. doesn’t work
My rationality thoughts on certain aspects of relationships:
• Your first time (hug, kiss, etc...) with a new partner
Be aware that you have built some expectations. Thus if your expectations were high(low) you are likely to be disappointed(overexcited). Then your second time will be perceived as better(worse) due to the regression towards the mean phenomena. So draw a representative sample before judging and start optimizing.
What about improving rationality with neurofeedback? The theory is that if you can see some kind of representation of your own brain activity (EEG for example), you should be able to learn to modify it. It has been shown that people could learn to control pain by watching the activity of their pain centres (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18224451.400-controlling-pain-by-watching-your-brain.html). Neurofeedback is also used to treat ADHD, increase concentration, and “it has been shown that it can improve medical students’ memory and make them feel calmer before exams.”
The word “Bias” is often associated with the word “prejudice” which has become loaded with rather negative associations. (People don’t like others to think of them as “prejudiced”) Especially as I am not a native english speaker until a week ago (I read LW since a month) I didn’t make a distinction between bias and prejudice as in my language the 2 words translate more or less the same. Maybe the process of “debiasing” should include to associate the word “bias” with “cognitive bias : a pattern of poor judgment” which every human brain has and there is nothing to be ashamed of.
Are you suggesting to leave everything to natural selection? Doesn’t strike me as the rationalists’ way.
The word “Bias” is often associated with the word “prejudice” which has become loaded with rather negative associations. (People don’t like others to think of them as “prejudiced”) Especially as I am not a native english speaker until 2 days ago (I read LW since a month) I didn’t make a distinction between bias and prejudice as in my language the 2 words have more or less the same translation . How can the general public be made to associate “bias” at least partially with “cognitive bias : a pattern of poor judgment” which every human brain has and there is nothing to be ashamed of?
I don’ see from where you conclude that ” immortal superbeings would do something polyish” . Why it is not as likely that they will evolve to have a series of monogamous relationships? The science of falling and staying in love is even now quite well understood . All it takes is few hormones. (see http://www.youramazingbrain.org.uk/lovesex/sciencelove.htm and the references therein). By using them only when with your partner you can make a love relationship monogamous relatively easy.
That said, do you have references for ” though probably considerably less than half of the population, who are genuinely and naturally well-suited to monogamous closed relationships” ? If the monogamous love is determined by hormones, which have been in humans for millions of years doesn’t it make it more likely that nowadays and few millions years future humans are more likely to be monogamous. A possible explanation for the “polypartners” people could be that because of the abundance of choice they are likely to make wrong decisions (see Human motivation :(http://lesswrong.com/lw/71x/a_crash_course_in_the_neuroscience_of_human/) I would expect future humans to be busy with more interesting and challenging things then finding the next sexual partner.
By the way you can experiment to hack yourself bisexual by trying to fall in love with a man with the three simple steps described in the end of the reference.
Alicorn would you have “hacked” yourself to be a secondary or n-th”ary ” of MBlume?
The “sheep dance ” is likely a result of a huge amount of “happy” (Adrenaline, dopamine, Serotonin) hormones being released in the brain(or even “limerence” (see for example Physical effects section from the “limerence” article on Wikipedia)). It is a very enjoyable state which I would even try to prolongate as long as possible (meaning over the course of several encounters). Isn’t it better to advice the male nerds to follow some of the courses on the bootcamps on how to dress or how to behave more masculine or to learn something from experts like lukeprog (for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvcuZhDWLgg or some of his other (earlier) posts on LW)
Alicorn is describing here a specific type of polyamorous relationship (classified on wikipedia as having Sub-relationships) . There are other types polyamory for example
“Group relationships, … in which all consider themselves associated to one another, popularized to some extent by Robert A. Heinlein (in novels such as Stranger in a Strange Land, Time Enough for Love, Friday” -Triad :Three people romantically involved. (Commonly initiated by an established couple jointly dating a third person; however, there are many possible configurations.) -Quads : Relationships between a couple and another couple
Although in this post the authors have emphasised more on the hijacking when we say things I find it somehow related to the “cognitive costs of doing things” ( see http://lesswrong.com/lw/5in/the_cognitive_costs_to_doing_things/ ) When you do something you always pay a price. Maybe in the list of what to do could be added to be prepared and estimate the price you are going to pay when you are planning to do something.
Also beware of the “beauty bias” (see www.overcomingbias.com) if a handsome/beautiful person tells you something its seems you are more likely to agree with him/her.
Great post. I really liked how you managed even in an intendedly heavy and technical post to mention hot sex. Please keep up in the future posts.
Why are these rationality habits? Based on what? All the examples are personal. Isn’t it possible to give (also) a scientific examples for each habit : study ….. shows that …. hence 1) the habit is useful for dealing with this bias 2) it doesn’t create or reinforce other biases.